skip to 3:54 for the only useful graph in this video.

And don't forget kiddies, economists tell us there is a structural rate of unemployment that is perfectly normal! Hooray!

Also, "Hidden, or covered, unemployment is the unemployment of potential workers that is not reflected in official unemployment statistics, due to the way the statistics are collected. In many countries only those who have no work but are actively looking for work (and/or qualifying for social security benefits) are counted as unemployed. Those who have given up looking for work (and sometimes those who are on Government "retraining" programs) are not officially counted among the unemployed, even though they are not employed. The same applies to those who have taken early retirement to avoid being laid off, but would prefer to be working. The statistic also does not count the "underemployed" - those with part time or seasonal jobs who would rather have full time jobs. In addition, those who are of working age but are currently in full-time education are usually not considered unemployed in government statistics. Because of hidden unemployment, official statistics often underestimate unemployment rates."- wiki

not sure whether to vote for this as it's whack.

Jobs created are less than we need for natural growth of population (but we're in a recovery)

bank bailouts cause the 'lost decade' period. Contrast to iceland, which is in recovery, and they bailed out no banks.

>> ^marinara:

Jobs created are less than we need for natural growth of population (but we're in a recovery)

I think people get pretty hung up on the technical terms. "Recession" means all the growth indicators are trending downward. "Recovery" means all or most growth indicators are trending upward.

Most people think "recession" means "the economy is bad" (aka below peak), and "recovery" means "the economy is good again" (aka in record territory). That's not what economists mean when they use those words.
>> ^marinara:
bank bailouts cause the 'lost decade' period. Contrast to iceland, which is in recovery, and they bailed out no banks.


Bailing out the banks doesn't cause the lost decade, it's the fuckup that made the banks need bailing out that causes it. Letting them collapse catastrophically doesn't make the economy better, it just makes the recession deeper and longer; just ask Herbert Hoover!

What Iceland did differently wasn't that they didn't bail out the banks, it's that they didn't ask their taxpayers to pay for it. They let the banks default on their international debts (which was most of it), had their central bank print up the money to cover their domestic debts (and then some), and instituted capital controls (taxes on international investment) to prevent people from pulling their money out of the country.

In other words, they did the polar opposite of what people like Peter Schiff or Ron Paul want anyone to do, and it's working out pretty well.

Moving this video to dotdude's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.